NECRO POST! - 4 years since I started this thread, I think I follow less SF advice than before. I probably spent the first 2 years since I joined SF learning the rules, and the subsequent years figuring out which ones I should break.

...interesting. That very statement is a by-product of group-think. The assumption is that the "rules" are correct or (at the least) standards. You have to believe that to acknowledge that there's a right and wrong way to break them.

I don't (think that I) subscribe to much SF group-think simply because I don't care about most of the things discussed here. I'm more of a recreational user. I pop in to see pictures of things that I like, and I give my advice/two-cents when I see a particularly provocative topic. Still, there's not much written here that gets through to me because I just don't care enough.

...interesting. That very statement is a by-product of group-think. The assumption is that the "rules" are correct or (at the least) standards. You have to believe that to acknowledge that there's a right and wrong way to break them.

That is a deeply flawed analysis. The unstated assumptions underpinning Claghorn's argument are that A) whether valid or not, the rules are broadly accepted in society, B) there is (or was) a rationale for the rules that might have some validity, and C) regardless of their validity, there are likely to be some consequences for breaking the rules which should be considered before doing so. In other words, it's about making an informed decision, not about prima facie accepting the 'rightness' of the rules.

Having said that, I dress more conservatively for work than many people who post here, and often far more casually than many outside of work. The 'rules' differ according to industry/profession, role, rank and geography, and so I mainly consider them in terms of how others will interpret what I'm wearing. It's an exercise in social anthropology.

While I learn from all of SF, those I respect the most are the members who post with a sense of humor and maintain a reasonable perspective on the comparative frivolity of the subject. Thankfully no one's life is on the line over the which is the best double-monkstrap, or whether fresco or finnmeresco is a better summer suiting fabric.

NECRO POST! - 4 years since I started this thread, I think I follow less SF advice than before. I probably spent the first 2 years since I joined SF learning the rules, and the subsequent years figuring out which ones I should break.

That is a deeply flawed analysis. The unstated assumptions underpinning Claghorn's argument are that A) whether valid or not, the rules are broadly accepted in society, B) there is (or was) a rationale for the rules that might have some validity, and C) regardless of their validity, there are likely to be some consequences for breaking the rules which should be considered before doing so. In other words, it's about making an informed decision, not about prima facie accepting the 'rightness' of the rules.

Having said that, I dress more conservatively for work than many people who post here, and often far more casually than many outside of work. The 'rules' differ according to industry/profession, role, rank and geography, and so I mainly consider them in terms of how others will interpret what I'm wearing. It's an exercise in social anthropology.

While I learn from all of SF, those I respect the most are the members who post with a sense of humor and maintain a reasonable perspective on the comparative frivolity of the subject. Thankfully no one's life is on the line over the which is the best double-monkstrap, or whether fresco or finnmeresco is a better summer suiting fabric.

Cheers,

LM

To use "broadly accepted" as justification would imply that it's "correct or (at the least) a standard)," which is what I said. Wording things differently as the basis for a long-winded rant is a "deeply flawed" debate strategy. Disagreeing is fine, but pulling things out of your @ss just for the sake of arguing with someone who you disagree with is another thing. After reading your first 1.5 sentences, I passed on reading the rest of your comment...nice job.

There are too many people on this board who it seems to me have acquired a small SF fan club and due to getting regular if not daily compliments from their entourage of a dozen strangers on the Internet, have fallen under the impression that they don't look fucking ridiculous to everyone else who sees them in the real world. Either that or a lot of people have been sold mirrors that were left over from the fun house!

NECRO POST! - 4 years since I started this thread, I think I follow less SF advice than before. I probably spent the first 2 years since I joined SF learning the rules, and the subsequent years figuring out which ones I should break.

To use "broadly accepted" as justification would imply that it's "correct or (at the least) a standard)," which is what I said. Wording things differently as the basis for a long-winded rant is a "deeply flawed" debate strategy. Disagreeing is fine, but pulling things out of your @ss just for the sake of arguing with someone who you disagree with is another thing. After reading your first 1.5 sentences, I passed on reading the rest of your comment...nice job.

As usual, your reading comprehension is as impressive as your manners. If you can't stand even polite disagreement you're not going to fare well in a discussion forum.

-I always leave one button open if a jacket has working sleeves
-I wear suits without ties
-I wear suits loose - not everything has to be fitted down to the millimeter
-I have many fused jackets - the dreaded "bubbling" seems to be an old wives tale with modern fusing technology
-I wear Hugo Boss - granted those items are few and far between as compared to when I joined, but they do make some nice stuff every now and again

NECRO POST! - 4 years since I started this thread, I think I follow less SF advice than before. I probably spent the first 2 years since I joined SF learning the rules, and the subsequent years figuring out which ones I should break.

I wear Hugo Boss and Banana Republic. The former I've never had a problem with and with the latter I've learned to be selective. I like wearing a tie without a jacket, and rolling up my shirt sleeves while doing so, if it's warm out. I wear beanies with suits because warmth takes priority over congruity.

As far as knowing rules: the rules are social constructs which represent a vague aggregate of aesthetic standards. Acknowlegment of those standards, as well as understanding the root of those standards, allows for any deviation to be both a more significant and a more accurate representation of your personality and style.

Writers who break the rules of grammar effectively are able to do so because they understand those rules. Yes, such rules are a bit more "in stone," but the principle holds, especially if allowing for greater flexibilty in dressing than in writing.

This all providing that you care; nothing wrong with style apathy as long as it doesn't slide into sloppiness.

SF gives me context, awareness, knowledge, and perspectives that helps me optimize the way I dress.

Several things I learned...

-In general, fit is more important than pretty much anything else (aside from outrageous color and design)
-You can find inexpensive suits that look good but almost impossible to find inexpensive shoes that look good

Several things I learned...
-In general, fit is more important than pretty much anything else (aside from outrageous color and design)
-You can find inexpensive suits that look good but almost impossible to find inexpensive shoes that look good